Legal Opinion

Sanborn v. Doe

California Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1891No. 13580PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Mendocino County. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtDe Haven, J.

The defendants were copartners on November 11, 1886, and on that day filed in the superior court of Mendocino County their petition in insolvency, and such proceedings were had therein that on May 4, 1887, the court duly made and entered its decree discharging them from all their debts and liabilities. *153The plaintiff was not at that date a creditor of either of said defendants, but thereafter several of those who were such creditors, and whose claims were discharged by said decree, assigned their claims to plaintiff, and he thereupon commenced this action to set aside the said order or decree…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Dickinson v. SeaverMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  2. Milwaukee & Minnesota Railroad v. Milwaukee & Western RailroadWisconsin Supreme Court · 1865
  3. Cross v. Sacramento Sav. BankCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Goodley v. Wank & Wank, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1976
  2. Whitney v. KelleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Mason v. Drug, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. City of Sebring v. WolfSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  5. Archer v. FreemanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API